User talk:Lapsus Linguae

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

Hello Lapsus Linguae, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! 

There, now you have one of those for this talk page too.  :)

There's no way to merge contribution histories that I know of... The best thing to do, from what I've seen, is just to put a note on your talk page that you used to contribute as the IP with a link to its contributions, saying people can find your past contributions there.

Hope that helps, Bushytails 18:41, 23 October 2005 (UTC).

Thanks Bushytails. No worries about merging contribution histories. --Craig 19:22, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome and Hello!

Welcome! I saw your note on Busytails page while I was reviewing his RfA. I'm glad you have joined the project, and it looks like you have the makings of a great contributor! It's nice to see someone new who is making a concerted effort to learn the ways of the community while new, too many people wander on here and just start doing whatever, and it's a real challenge to try and reign them in. I encourage you to be bold, contribute strongly, and have fun! If there is ever anything I can do for you or any questions you may have, feel free to contact me, through e-mail or my talk page! Best regards, Ëvilphoenix Burn! 21:39, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Thank-you for your nice note. Have just spent some time (too much time!) having my eyes crossed at the footnotes and cite sources pages, so I am learning slowly. --Craig 12:21, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Re: User page vandalism

No worries! Hope I didn't interrupt your train of thought. Wow, it only took you a few days of being registered to get your first user page vandalism... you must be doing something right :-) it took me a bit longer than that... PS. you might want to put a link to your talk page in your sig so people can go straight to your talk page. PPS. Welcome! —deanos}{ Ł }{ 14:36, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

No, nothing interrupted. I'm editing in a local text editor anyway, but the flurry of vandalisms meant it got put on the back burner anyway. And yes, I'm rather proud of my rocketing to fame in only four days. :) Thanks for the suggestion about the talk link. It's on my list of things to figure out. --Craig 15:19, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] !

I too enjoyed the process. Haiduc 03:28, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] No problem

You're a relatively new user, but I can see you've already, unfortunately, become fairly familiar with vandalism. ;) Tally ho! · Katefan0(scribble) 00:05, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not sure what's worse -- people who have nothing better to do than vandalise, or people who have better things to do than revert vandalism, but do it anyway! :) --Craig (t|c) 00:08, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Spam

In this case what concerned me was that a user affiliated with the site in question was adding dozens of links to it across Wikipedia. This was clearly promoting the site, and many of these links were misplaced or POV. If you, as a neutral observer, feel that this particular link is a valuable one, by all means replace it. - SimonP 01:01, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I wasn't aware of the overview as you apparently are, but I will take a closer look at the link and see if it confirms my initial belief. If I believe it's still a valid link I'll put it back, otherwise I'll leave it out. --Craig (t|c) 01:05, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] This is not vandalism according to Wikipedia's policy.

I'm a newcomer to wikipedia. I noticed that this is a public website that minors are encouraged to access by schools and parents for doing research. The pictures can be considered pornographic by many and exposes this site to federal legal recourse. Words are one thing but the images sure will provoke a response from people who would other wise over look this article. I don't believe whatever benefit people think these pictures will add to the quality of this site outweigh the potential negative ramifications. If someone wants to see pictures of sexual acts, there is more than enogh material out there that can suit their fancy. Wikipedia should stay away from these hotzones if it wishes to avoid potential government intervention and future regulations.

Hi Neosmitty. Thanks for sharing your opinion with me. However, as a newcomer, you should have had a look around before taking it upon yourself to start censoring Wikipedia, something that has been tried over and over again in the past. Please have a look at the following links before continuing to remove content that others have worked hard to create, as doing so is definitely considered vandalism:
Thanks.
--Craig (t|c) 05:01, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] I appreciate the enlightenment.

This website is an Adult Content website and will eventually have to obey the laws that govern such sites since there are no formal measures for monitoring the content. Simply saying that one is not responsible is not good enough. If you love this site you should protect it by not supporting this. There needs to be a wikipedia for adult material only. I also notice that this site does not register as an adult site. You only add to the demise of this great endeavor by supporting this behaviour.

But I now know that debating this with users on this site is moot. I'll go elsewhere.


Thank you.

Neosmitty 05:17, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

You're welcome. I didn't write the policies, but I do agree with them so I suppose we will have to agree to disagree. --Craig (t|c) 05:24, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Robert Cormack

The article does not actually meet any criteria for speedy deletion. Now, as it was a blatantly obvious hoax, I've chosen to ignore all rules and delete it anyway. But I think you should have maybe been more specific in your tagging of the article as a speedy candidate, since it definitely wasn't WP:PN. - ulayiti (talk) 13:26, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, when I re-read the criteria you are absolutely right, but in my mind it fit the dictionary definition of patent nonsense, if not the Wikipedia definition. Seems odd to me that, as you say, such a blatantly obvious hoax would have to go through some sort of drawn-out process to be deleted rather than deleted on sight, but it's only the second article I have tagged for speedy deletion. :) --Craig (t|c) 13:41, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Dome of the Rock/Link spam

Craig, sorry about that. I was actually intending to revert another edit that was made by an anonymous IP address (203.130.195.122) early this morning that eliminated this sentence:

The rock in the center of the dome is believed by Muslims to be the spot from which Muhammad was brought by night and from which he ascended through the heavens to God. Accompanied by the angel Gabriel, he was consulted by Moses and given the obligatory Islamic prayers before returning to earth. It is a holy place to Muslims.

This was the sentence I wanted to restore. Since you had eliminated the link spam after that sentence had been cut, your edit got caught up in my revert. Sorry about that! I've now restored the sentence but eliminated the link that you elmiinated. --Jfruh 15:18, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

No worries. Thanks. :) --Craig (t|c) 15:20, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Nutrilite

Not a problem, yes I think we were making our edits at the exact same time. I've become kinda hookoed on Amway articles, I guess I just thrive on controversy. :) Best,Paul Paul 15:38, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Talk:Rhodesia (disambiguation)

Greetings, Craig. I hope you've been well. My apologies for the lengthy delay in responding to your comments. I have done so now, though, as mentioned, I fear that until either of us tracks down decent print sources, the early timeline will remain an issue. Let me know what you think. All the best, El_C 23:21, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Lengthy delay?! It has been so long since I was here (to edit) that I have forgotten wiki markup! Sorry for that. Anyway, I will go and look at the information on the talk page and see what I can see. (Now how do you sign posts again?! Oh yeah....) Craig (t|c) 06:29, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Walken

I flipped it; the angle is so bad, that I thought it would be better if he was at least facing the article. he was hard to photograph. Almost all the photos of him are crap. --David Shankbone 23:29, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. My curiosity has been fulfilled. --Craig (t|c) 22:52, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image source problem with Image:Affretair logo.jpg

Image Copyright problem

This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:Affretair logo.jpg. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 12:41, 7 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 12:41, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image source problem with Image:Air Rhodesia logo.gif

Image Copyright problem

This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:Air Rhodesia logo.gif. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:52, 7 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 14:52, 7 September 2007 (UTC)